When I heard that President Trump took questions from the news media yesterday, and the press conference got a bit rowdy, I decided to listen FOR MYSELF. When other people want to serve as your ears and tell you what to think about something or someone, it is probably not a good idea to take their kind offer too seriously.

Post navigation

27 thoughts on “UNFILTERED: WHAT DID HE SAY THAT WAS NOT TRUE?”

In the past, presidents have taken sides without full knowledge of the facts. I like a president that doesn’t take one side based on incomplete information to satisfy a political agenda.
Examples: The LA riots, the Trayvon Martin shooting, Ahmed and his stupid clock…..

I’m sorry about the long post but these are going to be my last words here and I want to get it all out there.

Before I started voting nearly two decades ago, I sized up the two political parties and their electorates (aka the base that the politicians pander to). I decided the republican party was definitely the one for me. Republicans, on the whole, seemed so much more thoughtful and less prone to groupthink. They cared more about moral character; taking a strong stand and impeaching Bill Clinton for his indiscretion. They championed issues that I care about such as abortion.

And so for many years I proudly filled in the bubble next to the name next to the (R) in every single local, state, primary, and federal election. Every election. Every time. With a few exceptions here and there. This went on for almost twenty years. Until the election last November.

What is the point of what I am doing? Besides to challenge you a bit? I’m trying to find out to what extent I still hold on to the evaluation my 18 year old self made. I’m also trying to find out just how many republicans wish to expel my voice from their party (it seems like quite a large contingent).

I don’t usually spend too much time on political blogs or reading political analysis, but the last six days have been a bit of an exception to that. I accepted your opinion that POTUS’ response to Charlottesville has been without fault, even if I find that opinion mildly exasperating (me and many others; even leaders within the republican party). It wasn’t until this post which seemed to express frustration about the news media that I had any questions for you.

So I ask a couple of sincere questions about your feelings on the media coverage to try and get some clarification on your position. The burning question in my mind that I was really trying to get at – “Does Citizen Tom believe, like so many others seem to, that the president is above criticism? Does he believe that ALL of this critical media coverage is entirely unfair? Does he believe it was wrong for the media to give any voice to those who were offended by the president’s comments?” I was thinking that if you engaged me on this that you and I might quickly agree that it is appropriate for the media to levy some criticism even if we disagree about the extent to which it is fair and warranted.

I am no closer at all to understanding your position on this. You did answer the one question (thank you), but I’m not seeing any clarification on your opinion to the media response to all this.

You and I are going to have to agree to disagree (maybe even profoundly disagree) on the president, on the merits of “political correctness”, and on how best to handle many racial issues. That’s okay. But if I’m not convinced that you can accept at least some of the negativity coming from people like me and that you’re also okay with seeing that negativity disseminated in the media – well, then it will be very hard for me to take you seriously.

You may have noticed, or you may not have, that I don’t talk much about myself. I don’t try to justify my opinions because of my special knowledge, experience, or expertise. What that involves is bringing up bunches of extraneous material into a debate. When you or anyone else has to decide what is right or what is wrong, who Citizen Tom is does not matter.

Am I trying to attack you personally? No. I am trying to avoid it.

I asked you a simple question. What did Trump do wrong? Did you answer that? Nope! Instead, you put the burden of proof upon Trump and his defenders to prove their innocence. We might even be against free speech. And you are worried we are trying to expel you from the party?

If you cannot state what Trump has done wrong, what is the point of acting like he has done something wrong? Why does he have to justify himself? You don’t see anything hostile in insisting that Trump is guilty until he proves his innocence? Apparently, you don’t, but I do.

If we have to “prove” our innocence in advance, consider what that means. We have to be politically correct 100 percent of the time and start damning everyone that Democrat Liberals oppose as racists.

Yet you say you voted Republican. Well, maybe you did, but if this is the behavior you insists upon from Republicans, then who needs Democrats?

I will grant you that much of the analysis that has been presented by the mainstream media is a bit over the top. The scathing criticism and goading I’m seeing from the press is probably excessive.

What I have NOT seen is any claim by a mainstream media outlet that he lied during the 8/15 press conference (please do educate me if I’m missing something). From what I’ve seen, their criticism is based on nuances that you so patronizingly refer to as “nitnoids.”

The problem is not the factual content. The crux of the criticism is that POTUS has now repeatedly qualified his remarks on white supremacists by also remarking on how bad the leftist groups are. This qualification can reasonably be interpreted (and IS interpreted – especially by the white supremacists) as a justification of sorts. If he truly feels that antifa and BLM are of an equal or greater danger to this country than the neo-nazis and the KKK, he should state that very plainly and then argue the case as to why he feels this way (a difficult case to make IMHO). If he feels that the leftists are of a lesser danger, then he should offer his remarks on them in a different context — not as part of a statement on white supremacy.

I don’t know how to answer your question better than that. If you have examples of the mainstream media reporting that he lied in the press conference, I will happily re-evaluate. If not, then I suggest that you modify the title of this blog post.

Now I have a question for you:

Notwithstanding David Duke’s recent admonishment, do you disagree with the notion that white supremacists have demonstrated much enthusiasm for POTUS since the early stages of his campaign? More open enthusiasm for him than for any other successful state/federal politician since George Wallace or Strom Thurmond? Do you disbelieve public statements from their own members that they find his candidacy and presidency emboldening? If not, then do you grapple with this AT ALL? From where I sit, it looks as though you either ignore the obvious or feel as though it’s not important enough for reflection.

World War II started when Nazis and Communists started fighting over Poland. Ignoring the role of groups like Antifa and Black Lives Matter (BLW) in Charlottesville, VA is akin to pretending the USSR did not invade Poland, yet that is what some people people would have us do. It is those people who need to explain themselves, not Trump. The riot in Charlottesville involved a fight between two groups. The white supremacists did not riot all by themselves. Yet you think Trump is not supposed to mention who white supremacists were fighting? That is absurd.

Just because you have judged they white supremacists are more dangerous than the Antifa, BLW, and their allies, everyone who disagrees is a bigot? And you are serious? That requires some explaining too.

Tactics and strategy required us to ally ourselves with the USSR to beat Nazi Germany. Then we spent decades with ICBMs located in the USSR and on USSR subs pointed at us. Because there is so little difference between them, both the Nazis and the Communists are dangerous. Similarly, the white supremacists, Antifa, BLW, and other such violent groups don’t differ much.

As to your question, I have observed that most of Trump’s supporters are decent citizens who love our country. What matters to these people is what Trump stands for and does. I have no idea how any politician is supposed control which radical groups vocally lend him their support. I support the First Amendment. Don’t you? So the question does not matter.

If you don’t like Trump just because you don’t like some group of extremists (whose support Trump has not sought) say they support him, that is a personal problem you will have to solve on your own. I don’t even know where to start.

I perceived this blog post to be a complaint about the press conference media coverage; I tried to more or less limit my comments to the media coverage without offering too many of my personal views of the broader discussion. I will try and be more clear and concise now:

1.) As far as I know, the mainstream media didn’t explicitly accuse POTUS of lying during the press conference. Thus, I can’t judge the media response using the criteria that you proposed.

2.) The media criticism has been more damning than necessary, but it’s rooted in a valid viewpoint that’s worthy of inclusion in our public discourse.

For the record, I did not say or imply that you or anyone else is a bigot. I try to remain respectful. Also, I don’t actually have the patience to argue about which terrorist groups are more dangerous so I want to keep that outside the scope of discussion.

“I have no idea how any politician is supposed control which radical groups vocally lend him their support.”

And you are serious? Politicians have managed to successfully disavow the KKK for decades. Now I wouldn’t expect POTUS to misalign his policies the way that Robert Byrd did. However, a consistent message of condemnation has worked for past politicians. It’s harder to do in the era of the 24 hour news cycle, but surely a gifted politician can control this in large measure. In my estimation the reason that this is an issue now when it wasn’t before is that POTUS tends to be quite wishy washy without his teleprompter. He made a good speech and then erased it a day later. Entirely unnecessary. I’m not saying he’s a bigot. But I am saying he often appears wholly unconcerned with being championed by white supremacists.

Again, this criticism is not arbitrary and it holds a place in our public discourse whether you agree with it or not. It’s not appropriate to immediately dismiss it as absurd or especially to denounce the media for including it in their analysis pieces.

“So the question does not matter.”

I take that as a categorical “no” — that you do not find the white supremacist glee worthy of your reflection. That’s disheartening. If you reflected on it, I hope you would better understand why so many Americans are offended by the president’s recent remarks and perhaps you wouldn’t be as quick to shut down the discussion. If the president himself reflected on it, I hope he would find a way to be more careful in front of the cameras.

What is the point of what you are doing? What is the point of what the news media is doing. It is plain the president disapproves of the white supremacists groups. So he disapproves of Antifa and BLW too? That a problem?

Is it a problem to disapprove of both robbery and murder? Are we just suppose to disapprove of murder because disapproving of robbers might make the murderers happy? Seriously?!!!!

And you are serious? Politicians have managed to successfully disavow the KKK for decades.

Actually, that is not true. When the Bible asserts we cannot save ourselves, I can find lots of examples of that. The Democratic Party has a long, sustained history of racism.
— Before the Civil War, Democrats tried to spread slavery to the territories.
— Democrats led the effort in the South to secede from the Union.
— During the Civil War, Copperheads in the Democratic Party opposed the American Civil War, wanting an immediate peace settlement with the Confederates, and their position was in the Democratic Party’s 1864 platform.
— After the Civil War, Democrats led the effort to institute Jim Crow laws. It is not that hard to make the case that the Democratic Party was the party of the Ku Klux Klan.
— The Democratic Party fought the Civil Rights movement to the bitter end.
— The Democratic Party is the party of abortion and funds Planned Parenthood which targets blacks.
— The Democratic Party is the party of the welfare state. Their programs break up families, thus keeping those on welfare dependent, especially blacks.

Can you think of any reason why blacks should vote Democrats, especially when the Republican Party has done the most to protect our rights? I cannot, but the vast majority of blacks do vote Democrat. Unfortunately, such appalling self-destructive foolishness is characteristic of the human race, not just blacks.

Anyway, you want the president to be politically correct. Since Trump has not got the patience to spout nonsense, why don’t you consider what the man is doing? What has he done wrong?

8:14 As I said on, remember this Saturday: “We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence. It has no place in America.” And then I went on from there

He has omitted key parts in his quote. What he actually said (video), the Whitehouse transcript of the actual Saturday remarks, with the omitted parts highlighted.We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides. On many sides. It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. This has been going on for a long, long time.It has no place in America.

It was the “on many sides” equivocation that gave rise to the criticism and he leaves this out in his video. A lawyer may be able to defend the “As I said on, remember this Saturday”, in my book it is a lie by omission.

B) What decent person is going to attend a rally organized with invited speakers from the KKK, the neo-Nazis and white supremacists, accompanied by Neo-Nazi music? So how many “good people” do you think took part in the Unite the Right rally. The warming up on Friday looked like this: https://youtu.be/hVc1hvD6mCw “You will not replace us” “Blood and Soil” “My people, my mission, end immigration” So where are the lots of good people marching together with KKK/Alt-Right/White Supremacists/Neo-Nazis. I have difficulties to spot them here or in any of the videos or photos of the events on Friday or Saturday, yet President Trump claims they were there. Can you help me out?

Those are the two most glaring parts that Trump said that I consider not true.

We condemn in the strongest possible terms this egregious display of hatred, bigotry and violence, on many sides. On many sides. It’s been going on for a long time in our country. Not Donald Trump, not Barack Obama. This has been going on for a long, long time.
It has no place in America.

This is simply true. Nazis and Communists hate each other, and no sane person wants either these two groups in the country. Unfortunately, all we can do is jail them after they break the law. So what else is new?

B. Did the presence of Antifa and Black Lives Matter stop people opposed to the monument from showing up? No.

When a demonstration starts attracting lots of crazies, no one should want to be in the vicinity. What is the point? There are other ways to make our feelings known, but that does not stop people who should know better. They don’t. They should, but they don’t.

Do you lack the grace to concede the good intentions of ANY of the people who disagree with you? When you suggest Trump is a racist, you judge everyone who supports him and destroy any hope of finding common ground. Why? With respect to Charlottesville, VA, Trump seems to doing what he should. He just is not doing EXACTLY in scrupulous detail what Obama would do. Since Obama was just throwing fuel on the fire, why should he?

A) Trump claimed to quote verbatim and then withheld an important part of the quote.

B) Is there a difference between joining a demonstration which is
1) organized by bad people, announced as such and immediately showcasing its bad intents
2) organized by good people to counter 1) and where bad people show up uninvited?

Would a decent person attend 1) in the first place?

As for the equivocation of violence by Trump.
One side came prepared with (some were equipped better than state police)
– sticks,
– mace/pepperspray,
– shields,
– batons,
– long guns,
– knifes,
– helmets and
– body armor
and from what I have seen took part in fights en masse, using mace/pepperspray sticks and shields.
One of theirs drove a car into people, killed one and injured a score.

A smaller part of the other side came with
– helmet,
– sticks,
– stones and
– mace/pepperspray and
took part in fights using these.

Spot any difference in level of preparedness for a fight or the level of violence dished out?

For the sake of argument, I will concede the point. The white supremacists came prepared to defend themselves. Considering the white supremacists were immediately attacked, and the police did not keep the two main antagonists apart, I have a difficult time blaming the white supremacists for being prepared to defend themselves.

Waiting for someone us to defend us does not always work out, particularly when we are depending upon people whose ethics are driven by their politics, some kind of us versus them ideology. The police did not keep the groups apart. Why? Lots of people think that the politicians did not want to do so, and subsequent events certainly support such conjecture.

In Virginia, it is legal to own and carry a firearm. Keeps the crime rate down. That lovely young lady was killed with a car, not any of the weapons in your list.

Curious. I would like to say I honestly don’t understand such myopia, but I do.

I don’t entirely understand why the news media is so biased, but I have seen enough evidence to know that they are. I also know that some people insist upon having their point of view affirmed. Period. So just as we tend to eat what we like, we digest the news that affirms us.

Here is the last verse in the Book of Judges. It is instructive.

Judges 21:25 New King James Version (NKJV)
25 In those days there was no king in Israel; everyone did what was right in his own eyes.

The Book of Judges is rather horrifying. The people of Israel had for the most part forgotten God. Judges 21:25 is the last verse in the book, and it summarizes it. The book tells how the people of Israel behaved when they did what was right in their own eyes. There was no king who ruled their hearts. They had forgotten God.

In Nazi Germany, the people forgot God, to strive to see their neighbors as He sees us, all sinful. In Communist Russia, the people forgot God, to strive to see their neighbors as He sees us, all sinful. As we ourselves are, sinful.

In my nation, we are engage in civil war. So far the bullets have yet to fly, but the political discourse is full of epitaphs, lies, and innuendos, Often various news outlets deceive by reporting one what serves their agenda, covering up what does not.

So yes, there were some Nazi sympathizers in Charlottesville, but there were other violent people their too.

You don’t see that? It seems to me you don’t want to see that. It is almost equates to saying that there are no communists/anarchists in the United States, and that is just plain silly.

As for the equivocation of violence by Trump.
One side came prepared with (some were equipped better than state police)
– sticks,
– mace/pepperspray,
– shields,
– batons,
– long guns,
– knifes,
– helmets and
– body armor
and from what I have seen took part in fights en masse, using mace/pepperspray sticks and shields.
One of theirs drove a car into people, killed one and injured a score.
A smaller part of the other side came with
– helmet,
– sticks,
– stones and
– mace/pepperspray and
took part in fights using these.
Spot any difference in level of preparedness for a fight or the level of violence dished out?

Where are you getting this information? I’ve seen photos of antifa with masks, clubs, shields. There is absolutely nothing I’ve read that would indicate antifa is either underarmed/ underprepared or under-represented.

Per the synagogue video you provided:
Please observe the “three men dressed in fatigues armed with semi-automatics stood in front” at the one minute mark. Really take a look at the picture. Still the image and look at it. Do you see any Nazi flags or distinctive symbols? Those are militia members. Notice them talking to the folks in rainbow colors? Whose side do you think misses (or mister) rainbow socks is on? Does the confrontation look like it contains animus to you? Or do you believe they just left the violent part out in this obvious spin piece?

Both sides are to blame.
Antifa is making the neo-Nazi party relevant….when they should be nothing but laughed at and ignored. They’re making them relevant by showing up to their rallies and attacking them. Not long ago neo-Nazi rallies didn’t even make the news. Now we have antifa throughout social media, “Band together and take Nazi scalps!” what exactly do you expect to happen? We’re all being played.

In my opinion, what we are experiencing is a generation conflict. We have a generation that has grown up different than us. Many have grown up in single parent households with minimum discipline in both home and schools. Schools absent of teaching of Spiritual Wisdom values. Teachers that teach liberal values and are squelched by liberal administrators to not discipline students or lose their positions and livelihood.

What you sow, you reap.

What we are witnessing now is a generation that recognizes the hypocrisy of a society that is opposite of what they are being taught and they are rebelling against older generation values.

They are rebelling against the vast differences in wealth, lack of job opportunity, separation of rich living alongside poor. They resent being taught that the USA Constitution says all men are created equal and believe it is not equal.

They have been exposed to drugs because Legislators ignored the problem.

Only 50 percent of millennials voted in the last election. That is an indication of the lack of civics courses in their schools, apathy and comatose of their surroundings and a future path .

Fear of the discipline of the Lord or fear of any consequences of their actions is not in their composition. Perhaps when they have their own kids?

I do not have an answer and believe in time the generation will in time weather thru this as all generations do as they age.

Keep in mind that this generation won’t and probably cannot comprehend what Trump tells them the truth that ‘it takes two to tangle,” and worse is they do not care or understand.

All they have experienced is what has been taught them, or not taught them by a liberal agenda.

Whether they are right or wrong, who knows. I believe the Vietnam generation who protested the Vietnam War turned out to be right.

However, later politicians led them into the Middle East conflicts, so apparently the leaders did not learn from that experience.

What politicians need to recognize now is that Millennials will decide the future of the USA. The same millennials that have been taught in liberal government schools rather than religious values.

I’m 32, and for the most part I agree with the Wisdom of Christianity, I went to parochial Catholic school though, and went to college in my mid-twenties not late teens, argued a lot with my professors as I was no longer impressionable.

I was aghast when I graduated and the first time I substitute taught at a Junior High, they were literally taking students outside to teach them how to protest. Also, there was an assignment, from two years ago, when the teach had 30 people’s dossiers and students had to pick the five dirtiest they wanted to survive on the island. I thought holy cow this is a eugenics assignment, why are parents allowing this?

Each of us is different. In addition, we each have differing experiences. That is the way God made us and planned our lives. So we experience God’s Creation and the revelation of His Word differently. Therefore, there is no way we entirely agree to the nth detail about everything. That is part of what makes it difficult to love another person. No one we know entirely affirms us because they are just like us. This is why agape love comes out of humility, not pride.

How Trump doesn’t get so angry with these journalists and lash out at them is an attribute of his patience.

As for me, watching these press conferences just makes me so frustrated with the media because they want so desperately to trap people into saying something that will allow them to load their proverbial weapons and pen something that isn’t completely true so they can ruin as many people as they please. How is that not a form of terrorism?

Words From The Past

When I left him, I reasoned thus with myself: I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know. — Socrates (from here)

“I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: as government expands, liberty contracts.” Ronald Reagan.